Compared to the countries of Northern Europe and Central Europe, the use of bicycles inFrance seems very poor: nine times lower than in the Netherlands, six times lower than inDenmark, three times less than in Germany, Belgium or Switzerland. Why such differences?The cultural explanation often put forward is suffering from so many exceptions that it is notcredible. The history of representations of the bicycle in each country does not exhaust eitherthe subject. To understand these differences, we must to examine the evolution of urbantransport policies and the resulting urban form, and for at least three reasons. 1/ It isimpossible to develop the use of bicycles without simultaneously reducing the use of othermodes, because the trip market is not extensible. 2/ The practice of the bicycle is verysensitive to road safety conditions and therefore to the influence of traffic. 3/ The bike isinadequate to make all trips and must necessarily be part of a sustainable transportationsystem combining walking, cycling and public transport.Specifically, it is appropriate to adopt a historical approach by identifying the main periodsof taking account of the bicycle in the transport policies and perform at the same time a workof international comparison. Three countries are more particularly studied: the France of course, the Netherlands for their exemplary cycling policy and Germany because its policy inthis area has long been close to that of France before to diverge.The report is therefore a urban cycling story in Europe in the overall evolution of mobility.The first chapter recalls the origins of the bicycle when it was shown, at the end of the nine-teenth century, as a symbol of modernity. Chapter 2 describes the democratization of thebicycle, from the early twentieth century to the 30’s. and the first threats to its developmentrelated to various attempts to adapt the city to the automobile. Chapter 3 recalls how, in thepost-war, cycling has rapidly declined throughout Europe, including the Netherlands andDenmark, under the pressure of the automobile growth and with the now systematic adap-tation of the city to it, and it points out the influence, in France, of the unbridled rise of mopeds. Chapter 4 describes the strong reactions of civil society in all automotive and howgovernments attempt to revive urban cycling during the 70’s. Chapter 5 explains why, in the80-90’s, the bike use rises in some countries like the Netherlands, Denmark and Germany, butcontinues to decline in others, such as France. Chapter 6 tries to understand why in this coun-try, however, during the 2000’s, urban cycling restarts in city centres, but decrease in thesuburb, then tip the inconsistency of the ecological argument and the relevance of economicand public health arguments. A final chapter develops some key aspects of a policy of cyclingcity, such as the importance of city calming to encourage cycling, the necessary interface withpublic transport, the crucial role of promoting cycling and the reconquest of audiences. In anappendix, the uplifting case study of Strasbourg is detailed.